Ad
HomeBuisnessWhen the father died, the lawyer's daughter asked for his ward, the...

When the father died, the lawyer’s daughter asked for his ward, the Supreme Court decided. Supreme Court Allotment and Occupancy Rules of Lawyers’ Chambers The court rejected an advocate’s plea for allotment of his late father’s chambers in Anamika Devan v. Registrar, Supreme Court of India and Ors. Pi News

Ad

Pi News –

When the father died, the lawyer's daughter asked for his ward, the Supreme Court decided

Ad

Supreme Court

Let’s say your father practices law in the Supreme Court, he is a lawyer and has a chamber in the court. If your father dies, can you also claim the same chamber as an advocate in the Supreme Court? Even if you emotionally want it to happen, the court has created an entire rulebook for it, and a case was recently decided based on it.

- Advertisement -

This interesting case was heard in the Supreme Court by Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra. Advocate Anamika Divan filed a petition in the court demanding the chamber where her father once sat as “Advocate on Record”. The Court dismissed this petition which required this Chamber. Hence, the ward that Anamika Diwan has claimed to be right will not be given to her.

What was all the talk?

All this case was heard in the court as ‘Anamika Diwan Vs Registrar High Court’. A bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra said that since the petitioner was not a practicing lawyer at the time of his father’s death, the matter did not merit consideration under the separation rules. Balraj Diwan, father of petitioner lawyer Anamika Diwan, was an advocate in the Supreme Court.

read this too

Ad

Balraj Diwan was allocated a chamber in the Supreme Court in 2006-2007. Balraj Diwan passed away about two and a half years ago in June 2021. About two years after his death, daughter Anamika Diwan was enrolled as an advocate in July 2023. Anamika first expressed her views before the ward allotting body. When he could not find a chamber there, he appealed to the bench.

Anamika’s evidence, the court’s evidence

Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora appeared for Anamika Diwan in the case before a bench of Supreme Court Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Prashant Kumar Mishra. Meenakshi Arora’s argument is that Anamika was already an advocate on the day she filed for ward partition. The court said that if she had been an advocate in the High Court when her father died, her application could have been considered. With this in mind, the Supreme Court ultimately found that the Chamber did not have jurisdiction under Rule 7B. The court dismissed the case.

What does the court order say?

There is a complete rulebook on the allocation of Bars. Clause 7B of this rule provides that if a barrister sitting on a ward dies, his children may be given a share of that ward. But this is only when the distribution commission fully satisfies the application of the person working in the Supreme Court. However, even after the panel is satisfied, there is a condition that only half of the respective ward should be allotted.

Ad
RELATED ARTICLES
Ad

Most Popular